Even as the U.S. government pumps billions of stimulus dollars into rebuilding aging infrastructure, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) has issued its third annual infrastructure report, which takes the nation to task for not having a comprehensive infrastructure development plan and for not wisely planning the use of stimulus money. The report, "Pivot Point," highlights how China, India, and Europe have invested heavily in modern infrastructure over recent decades, while the U.S. has coasted on its own prosperity, content with patching and repairing its outdated bridges, roads, and other transit and water projects.
"We will not continue to be a major world power if we can't get goods in and out of the country in an efficient, productive way," ULI executive vice president for initiatives, Maureen McAvey, tells ARCHITECT. "And the more we waste time in congestion on our roads, in having inadequate ports and inadequate delivery systems, and having congested airports-that's all loss of productivity."
Less than 6 percent of the stimulus money approved for highway projects so far is going toward new construction, according to a ProPublica analysis of federal transportation data. The vast majority, about 76 percent, will be spent repaving and widening roads.
Whenever I hear anyone complain about the costs of implementing the infrastructure for a new, "green" economy, I have to roll my eyes. After all, how much are we spending on the wrong kind of infrastructure, aging roads and bridges for a transportation system for a bygone era? Do these people think our grid of roads and highways sprung from the earth like mushrooms?
At times the cynic in me gnashes his teeth at the evidence that our new Democratic leadership is as backward-looking and conservative in their views on transportation and infrastructure as their Republican predecessors. But then I'm reminded that our Republican government almost completely neglected infrastructure altogether. In a sense, we're playing catch-up.
Still, I'd like to see some coherent transportation policy emanate from the White House eventually. The plans for a network of high-speed rail is a great start...
Congratulations to Brian Schweitzer for being elected chairman of the Democratic Governors Association. The news came on the heels of the Governors Association urging Obama to invest more money in the nation's infrastructure.
So the crucial questions become (1) how much will the government have to spend to get the economy back on track? and (2) what sort of spending will have the biggest impact on jobs and incomes?
The answer to the first question is "a lot." Given the magnitude of the mess and the amount of underutilized capacity in the economy-- people who are or will soon be unemployed, those who are underemployed, factories shuttered, offices empty, trucks and containers idled -- government may have to spend $600 or $700 billion next year to reverse the downward cycle we're in.
The answer to the second question is mostly "infrastructure" -- repairing roads and bridges, levees and ports; investing in light rail, electrical grids, new sources of energy, more energy conservation. Even conservative economists like Harvard's Martin Feldstein are calling for government to stimulate the economy through infrastructure spending. Infrastructure projects like these pack a double-whammy: they create lots of jobs, and they make the economy work better in the future....
Government should also spend on health care and child care. These expenditures are also double whammies: they, too, create lots of jobs, and they fulfill vital public needs.
Bingo. These Wall St. bailouts prop up the existing financial hierarchy of the country. They seem to be aimed to ensure that there's money available to be lent. But the bailouts don't address the recent spate of lost jobs, the accelerating decline of wages for the middle and working classes aggravated by unjust taxation, the shrinking number of people interested in borrowing money.
Investment in infrastructure provides jobs and gives people money to buy houses and health care and consumer goods. And investment in green infrastructure would create good manufacturing jobs around the country. And investment in infrastructure actually provides us with tangible, useful things like bridges, schools, and windmills.
Blogosphere Day became a phenomenon three years ago when blogs raised $30,000 into the campaign coffers of unknown candidate Ginny Schrader in a single day -- after her opponent had a surprise retirement.
It became an annual event a year later when blogs united in 2005 to raise $100,000 for upstart candidate Paul Hackett in his intensely uphill battle for the hard-right OH-02 in a special election.
Then, in 2006, blogs celebrated Blogosphere Day by sending funds to Ned Lamont.
(Necessary joke: Candidates apparently should avoid Blogosphere Day like the plague, it brings money and electoral ruin.)
ActBlue is a PAC that empowers individuals to raise candidates from family, friends, readers, and associates for the candidates they support. Since 2004, it has moved more than $25 million in donations, with a tiny budget and a brilliant concept. In the second quarter of 2007 alone, ActBlue facilitated $16,000 in donations to state-level candidates in Montana.
ActBlue allows any Democratic candidate in Montana to raise money online without worrying about the hassles of merchant accounts, paypal integration, and secure servers.
It is, in other words, a huge help in promoting progressive candidates. So, today, we're encouraging folks to give back a little bit. ActBlue is working to expand and they need help. Please, do what you can.
Chris Bowers and Matt Stoller (previously of MyDD) have joined forces with Mike Lux, the outsideriest insider in progressive politics, to launch Open Left, a new community blog dedicated to the new emerging progressive movement, which they refer to broadly as the open left. It should be a great site.
The state is doing unprecedented construction work over the biennium -- $300 million worth. Also unprecedented? We're paying for it up front, not with loans. The construction is happening at colleges, prisons, hospitals, and on things like fish habitat, public access improvements, and deferred maintenance.
Infrastructure is one of those very smart ways to spend public money. Good infrastructure brings business and keeps people. In the process of being built, it provides local jobs. And, in the worst case scenario that it does nothing for economic development, you've still got an improved version of whatever it was before.
Obviously, none of those generalizations are true in every case. But this is one of those moments when Cary Hegreberg and I agree.
